Abstract

BackgroundNeutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio (NLCR) has been reported as better indicator of bacteremia than procalcitonin (PCT), and more precise predictor of mortality than C-reactive protein (CRP) under various medical conditions. However, large controversy remains upon this topic. To address the discrepancy, our group has compared the efficiency of NLCR with conventional inflammatory markers in predicting the prognosis of critical illness.MethodsWe performed a multi-center retrospective cohort study involving 536 ICU patients with outcomes of survival, 28- and 7-day mortality. NLCR was compared with conventional inflammatory markers such as PCT, CRP, serum lactate (LAC), white blood cell, neutrophil and severity score APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) to evaluate the potential outcomes of critical illness. Then, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were constructed to assess and compare each marker’s sensitivity and specificity respectively.ResultsNLCR values were not different between survival and mortality groups. Meanwhile, remarkable differences were observed upon APACHE II score, CRP, PCT and LAC levels between survival and death groups. ROC analysis revealed that NLCR was not competent to predict prognosis of critical illness. The AUROCs of conventional markers such as CRP, PCT, LAC and APACHE II score were more effective in predicting 28- and 7-day mortality.ConclusionsNLCR is less reliable than conventional markers CRP, PCT, LAC and APACHE II score in assessing severity and in predicting outcomes of critical illness.

Highlights

  • Neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio (NLCR) has been reported as better indicator of bacteremia than procalcitonin (PCT), and more precise predictor of mortality than C-reactive protein (CRP) under various medical conditions

  • Systemic inflammation is an integral part of pathophysiological processes in critical illness

  • The White blood cell (WBC) count in 7-day mortality group was much higher than other groups

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio (NLCR) has been reported as better indicator of bacteremia than procalcitonin (PCT), and more precise predictor of mortality than C-reactive protein (CRP) under various medical conditions. Our group has compared the efficiency of NLCR with conventional inflammatory markers in predicting the prognosis of critical illness. Even though NLCR is a conveniently available marker, it did not obtain wide acceptance in clinical [2]. Cytokines and some acute phase proteins have been frequently used to assess the inflammatory processes in both clinical and research scenarios. C-reactive protein, white blood cell count and neutrophil percentage have long been recognized as valuable markers of inflammation [3]. These markers play great roles in recognition of inflammatory status, in assessing the severity of diseases and predicting the following outcomes. The sensitivity and specificity has yet to be determined

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call